CIT v. Maulikkumar K. Shah

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, SURAT, SURAT vs. VIKAS NANGALIA, SURAT

In the result, appeal of revenue and CO of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.972/Srt/2024& Assessment Year: 2020-21 (Physical Court Hearing) Deputy Commissioner Of Vikas Nangalia बनाम/ Income-Tax, Central Circle-4, D-1112, Canal Road, Surya Green Vs. Surat Room No.508, Majura View, Vesu, Surat-395 007 Gate, Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Acxpn 1361 L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) ""ा"ेप सं /Co No.26/Srt/2024 (A/O Ita No.972/Srt/2024) Assessment Year: 2020-21 Vikas Nangalia Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम/ D-1112, Canal Road, Surya Green Income-Tax, Central Circle-4, Vs. View, Vesu, Surat-395 007 Surat Room No.508, Majura Gate, Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Acxpn 1361 L (Co-Objector) (""थ" /Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.848/Srt/2024& Assessment Year: 2021-22 Deputy Commissioner Of Vikas Nangalia बनाम/ Income-Tax, Central Circle-4, D-1112, Canal Road, Surya Green Vs. Surat Room No.508, Majura View, Vesu, Surat-395 007 Gate, Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Acxpn 1361 L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By Shri Ramesh Malpani, Ca राज" की ओर से /Revenue By Shri Mukesh Jain, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 08/09/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 31/10/2025

…Annexure A-1 have no evidentiary value and addition on account of receipt of on money cannot be made merely on the basis of write-up on these pages: (i) Chintan Jadavbhai Patel vs. ITO, [2017] 79 taxmann.com 302 (Guj); (ii) CIT vs. Maulikkumar K. Shah, [2008] 307 ITR 137 (Guj); (iii) Common Cause (A Registered Society) vs. UOI, [2017] 394 ITR 220 (SC); (iv) DCIT vs. Prarthana Construction Pvt. Ltd.,Tax Appeal No. 79 of 2000 (Guj) and (v) CIT vs. Lavanya Land (P.) Ltd., [2017] 397 ITR 246 (Bom). 10. We have heard both parties and perused the materials available on record. We have also deliberated the decisions rel…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, SURAT, AAYKAR BHAWAN, MAJURA GATE, SURAT vs. VIKAS NANGALIA, VESU SURAT, GUJARAT

In the result, appeal of revenue and CO of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.972/Srt/2024& Assessment Year: 2020-21 (Physical Court Hearing) Deputy Commissioner Of Vikas Nangalia बनाम/ Income-Tax, Central Circle-4, D-1112, Canal Road, Surya Green Vs. Surat Room No.508, Majura View, Vesu, Surat-395 007 Gate, Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Acxpn 1361 L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) ""ा"ेप सं /Co No.26/Srt/2024 (A/O Ita No.972/Srt/2024) Assessment Year: 2020-21 Vikas Nangalia Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम/ D-1112, Canal Road, Surya Green Income-Tax, Central Circle-4, Vs. View, Vesu, Surat-395 007 Surat Room No.508, Majura Gate, Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Acxpn 1361 L (Co-Objector) (""थ" /Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.848/Srt/2024& Assessment Year: 2021-22 Deputy Commissioner Of Vikas Nangalia बनाम/ Income-Tax, Central Circle-4, D-1112, Canal Road, Surya Green Vs. Surat Room No.508, Majura View, Vesu, Surat-395 007 Gate, Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Acxpn 1361 L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By Shri Ramesh Malpani, Ca राज" की ओर से /Revenue By Shri Mukesh Jain, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 08/09/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 31/10/2025

…Annexure A-1 have no evidentiary value and addition on account of receipt of on money cannot be made merely on the basis of write-up on these pages: (i) Chintan Jadavbhai Patel vs. ITO, [2017] 79 taxmann.com 302 (Guj); (ii) CIT vs. Maulikkumar K. Shah, [2008] 307 ITR 137 (Guj); (iii) Common Cause (A Registered Society) vs. UOI, [2017] 394 ITR 220 (SC); (iv) DCIT vs. Prarthana Construction Pvt. Ltd.,Tax Appeal No. 79 of 2000 (Guj) and (v) CIT vs. Lavanya Land (P.) Ltd., [2017] 397 ITR 246 (Bom). 10. We have heard both parties and perused the materials available on record. We have also deliberated the decisions rel…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, SURA, SURAT vs. PIPODRA TEXTILE PARK LLP, SURAT

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.795/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Hybrid Hearing) Acit, Vs. Pipodra Textile Park Llp, S No.85, Vilol. Lindiad, Tal: Central Circle-3, Mangrol, Surat - 395002 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aasfp8206B (Appellant) (Respondent) ""या"ेप सं /Co No.27/Srt/2024 (Ay 2018-19) (A/O Ita No.795/Srt/2024 Pipodra Textile Park Llp Vs. Acit, S No.85, Vilol. Lindiad, Tal: Central Circle-3, Mangrol, Surat– 395 002 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aasfp 8206 B (Co-Objector) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By Shri Ramesh Malpani, Ca राज"वक" ओर से /Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Cit-Dr & Shri Kevin Langaliya, Ca सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 03/09/2025 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 31/10/2025

…iness entities, did not constitute material evidence and thus, notice u/s 153C of the Act was void. The Hon’ble Supreme Court dismissed the SLP against the order of the Hon’ble High Court. The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of CIT vs. Maulikkumar K. Shah, 307 ITR 137 (Guj.) held that mere entries in seized material are not sufficient to prove that assessee has indulged in such a transaction in which on-money has been received. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of CIT vs. Lavanya Lands Pvt. Ltd., 397 ITR 246 (Bom.) held that where seized documents were not in name of the assessee, no action could be taken…

RAJESH PODDAR,SURAT vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, SURAT

In the result, assessee's appeal is dismissed

…y value and addition cannot be made merely on the basis of this diary. In support of this contention, the Ld. AR relied on the following decisions: (i) Common Cause vs. Union of India – [2021] 126 taxmann.com 80 (SC); (ii) CIT vs. Maulikkumar K. Shah - [2008] 307 ITR 137 (Gujarat); (iii) Sunil Kumar Sharma vs. DCIT - [2023] 146 taxmann.com 553 (Karnataka); (iv) CIT vs. Sunil Kumar Sharma - [2024] 165 10 ITA No.547 & IT(SS)A 56/Srt/2024 A.Y 20-21 Rajesh Poddar taxmann.com 846 (SC) and (v) DCIT vs. Prarthana Construction P. Ltd. – Tax Appeal No. 79 of 2000 (Guj – HC) 10.1 Relying upon the ratio in the decisions cit…

HEMANT NARESH AGARWAL,SURAT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR. 4, SURAT

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआ.(खो और ज).सं /It(Ss)A No.68 & 70/Srt/2023 Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2018-19 (Physical Court Hearing) Deputy Commissioner Of Hemant Naresh Agarwal बनाम/ Income-Tax, Central Circle-4, 701, Shree Shyam Awas, Bhatar Vs. Surat Room No.508, 5Th Floor, Road, Near Vidhya Bharti School, Aayakar Bhawan, Majura Surat-395 010 Gate, Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Auppa 9003 J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita.No.170/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Hemant Naresh Agarwal Assistant Commissioner Of बनाम/ 701, Shree Shyam Awas, Bhatar Income-Tax, Central Circle-4, Vs. Road, Near Vidhya Bharti School, Surat, Aaykar Bhawan, Surat-395 010 Majura Gate, Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Auppa 9003 J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By Shri Kiran K. Shah राज" की ओर से /Revenue By Shri Mukesh Jain, Cit-Dr & Shri Kevin Langaliya, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 18/09/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/10/2025

…at even if the developer declares any profit on “on-money”, no addition is justified in his case in absence of evidence of actual payment of on-money for that particular shop. The Ld. AR also relied on the following decisions: (i) CIT vs. Maulikkumar K. Shah (307 ITR 137) (Guj.); (ii) CIT vs. Dhirajlal D. Patel (HUF) (Tax Appeal No. 579 of 2009) (Guj.); (iii) PCIT vs. King Buildcon (P) Ltd (2023) 456 ITR 770 (SC); (iv) DCIT vs. Royal Marwar Tobecco (P) Ltd (2009) 29 SOT 53 (Ahd. Trib.); (v) CIT vs. Abhisar Buildwell (P) Ltd (2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC); (vi) PCIT vs. Punchmukhi Managements Services (P) Ltd (2023) 456…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, SURAT, SURAT vs. SH. KAILASH AGRAWAL, SURAT

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garj & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.380/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 (Hybrid Hearing) Dy. Commissioner Of Shri Kailash Agarwal बनाम/ Income-Tax, Central Circle- A/1, 3003, Regent Textile Vs. 3, Surat, 5Th Floor Aayakar Market, Ring Road, Bhawan, Majura Gate, Surat– 395002 Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aappa 3267 N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) ""ा"ेप सं /Co No.3/Srt/2025 (A/O Ita No.380/Srt/2025/(Ay 2018-19) Shri Kailash Agarwal Dy. Commissioner Of बनाम A/1, 3003, Regent Textile Income-Tax, Central Circle- / 3, Surat, 5Th Floor Aayakar Market, Ring Road, Surat– Vs. 395002 Bhawan, Majura Gate, Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aappa 3267 N (""थ"/Respondent) (Co-Objector) िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee By Shri Ramesh Goyal, Ca राज"की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 13/08/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 23/09/2025

…erefore, it was held by CIT(A) that the addition of Rs.78,25,000/- made by the AO towards unaccounted investment u/s.69 of the Act was not warranted. CIT(A) placed reliance on the decision of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Maulikkumar K Shah 307 ITR 137 (Guj.), wherein it was held that addition should not be made only on the basis of entries found/recorded in seized material without any corroborative evidence. In view of the above facts and the precedent the appeal of the assessee was allowed by the CIT(A). 5. Aggrieved by the appellate order of the CIT(A), the revenue has preferred appeal befor…

SHRI BHANWAR LAL,JODHPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result the appeals of the assessee ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mitha Lal Meena & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

…s such no liability can be fastened on the basis of a mere entry in such documents without there being some further trustworthy/reliable corroborative evidence lending credence to such transaction mentioned in such documents. CIT v. Maulikkumar K. Shah [2008] 307 ITR 137 (Guj.): The decision of Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal were upheld holding that no addition was justified on the basis of these loose papers. In this case, nothings in the seized diary found from the premises were the only material on the basis of which the A.O. had made the impugned additions. The A.O. had not brought any…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAJKOT vs. CHETAN NANDLAL SANGANI, RAJKOT

In the result, Revenue’s appeal ITA No

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 248 & 249/Rjt/2022 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2018-19 & 2019-20) Deputy Commissioner Of Chetan Nandlal Sangani Income Tax, Central Circle– Vs. 309, Shalin Complex, 2, Madhavi Chowk, Soni Rajkot, “Amruta Estate”, 2Nd Bazar, Rajkot-360 001 Floor, Mg Road, Rajko-360 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Amvps 5788 E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

…was Rs.48 lacs. There is no material to support such finding of assessing officer Dumb document. Addition deleted." ITA 248 & 249/Rjt/2022 (AY 2018-19 & 2019-20) CHETAN NANDLAL SANGANI  Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Maulikkumar K. Shah 307 ITR 137 held that "Held, dismissing the appeal, that from the beginning the assessee was stating that the notings appearing in the diary were rough estimates and estimation was made for submission to the bank for obtaining a loan from the bank. The inference of the Assessing Officer that the assessee had received on money. i.e., the differential amount a…